Pawsome: <An Englishman> If you haven't seen it already, Geoff Lawton's "Its Only Me," a recent biography of Tony Miles, contains number of Miles' outings with the Nimzowitsch annotated by the man himself. An essay in the appendix of the work suggests that Miles "dabbled in" the Nimozwitsch, but the number of games in this database suggests his use of 1 ... Nc6 was more than a passing fancy.

InspiredByMorphy: <drukenknight> Although I dont have a board here to analyze 8. ...PxN I do believe this line is very good as white, and I thank you for showing it to me. Ive played 3.Nc3 Bxe4 4.Bd3 before where white has 3 developed pieces to blacks 1, but 3.Bc4 Bxe4 4.Bxf7+ is much better.

drukenknight: IBM: thanks, and we really must give credit to pawsome for taking an interesting idea and really sharpening it up. The reason I pose the question as I did (does sacking the exchange save the game?) is because....well, my gut feeling is if sacking the exchange does not save the game then 3...Bxe4?? loses the game. Is that possible?

The reasoning is intuitive and so it is open to debunking but here is my reasoning it has to do w/ endgames of B vs B of opposite color endgames. I learneed that they dont behave in the normal way; when you are down a couple of pawns attacking the K does nothing, you must reposition the B in order to improve positional value. Or as Dvoretsky says "often small positional differences are of more importance than material."

When black plays ...Bxe4 he grabs material however he will lose both tempo and position, or so it seems. His K cannot castle and white is ahead in development.

Time and position, we see these factors over and over in B endgames, we have seen several of them in the past week. If black tries to rectify the situation by like 6...Nf6 it gets worse due to the Qh5+.

Therefore it seems the only way for black to save this is to give up material and use this in order to rectify the time/positional problems.

ANd if giving up material does not work, there is no other way, hence 3...Bxe4?? loses....

Chris00nj: I actually had someone play St. George's Defense (1. e4 a6) against me this past weekend. I unintendendly disheartened him when I exclaimed, "St. George's Defense, are you serious?" (it was in the club so I knew the guy)

Knowing the name seemed to take away his "surprise" factor but I can't say I knew any lines, just remember that Tony Miles beat Karpov with it (Karpov vs Miles, 1980)

Eric Schiller: <FHBradley> Yes, Borg is just Grob backwards, but it fits nicely with the Star Trek villans, so the name is a nice one. Of course, those of us who are ancient, and tennis fans, are reminded of the Swedish ace, but I doubt he'd want to be associated with such an opening!

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous,
and 100% free--plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.

No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.

No personal attacks against other users.

Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific opening and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.